Posted: May 14, 2011 10:26 pm
I'm sick of reading this article. Every forum I've gone on over the last day is now discussing big pharma conspiracy due to this article.
It wasn't ignored. The testing was on mice. MICE. To go from testing on animals to human trials to accepted treatment doesn't take 5 minutes, it takes years, sometimes decades. Plus it's gone to human trials so it's hardly been ignored, covered up in a giant conspiracy, etc.
Plus the article gets simple biology wrong.
In human bodies there is a natural cancer fighting human cell, the mitochondria,
Last time I checked they were located inside of cells and are not cells themselves. If the article got this wrong, what else did it get wrong?
On another forum on which I post someone said that the human trials discovered that the dose needed in humans causes liver damage but they didn't provide a link so I don't know if that's true or not, but it does show that we need to show caution about claiming conspiracy, etc when something works in an animal trial but wasn't instantly used in hospitals worldwide to cure cancer.
It wasn't ignored. The testing was on mice. MICE. To go from testing on animals to human trials to accepted treatment doesn't take 5 minutes, it takes years, sometimes decades. Plus it's gone to human trials so it's hardly been ignored, covered up in a giant conspiracy, etc.
Plus the article gets simple biology wrong.
In human bodies there is a natural cancer fighting human cell, the mitochondria,
Last time I checked they were located inside of cells and are not cells themselves. If the article got this wrong, what else did it get wrong?
On another forum on which I post someone said that the human trials discovered that the dose needed in humans causes liver damage but they didn't provide a link so I don't know if that's true or not, but it does show that we need to show caution about claiming conspiracy, etc when something works in an animal trial but wasn't instantly used in hospitals worldwide to cure cancer.